 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nick(at)Scholtes1.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:40 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
 |
|
Guy,
Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located, I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago.
I really appreciate you comparing the flight characteristics to another airplane, something I can relate to. This type of response is very useful, much better than the "My feet are faster than yours, and if you're not man enough to fly a tailwheel, then you're a wuss" type of replies that seem to be so popular! I am very familiar with the Super Decathlon. If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with it at all.
The problem I have is that the one-and-only KitFox that I have flown, did not handle like a Decathlon at all. It handled like a, well, I don't know what it handled like. Let me describe: Firstly, the whole "you've got to use the rudders on a tailwheel airplane" thing really refers to it's ground handling. And, the KitFox I flew handled superbly on the ground, felt like a Cub. But, in the air, it was a totally different animal. In the air, it was untameable. It just simply wasn't any fun at all. What would happen is, I would get it straight-and-level and coordinated, and then a minor thermal (nothing even noteworthy) would come by, and all of a sudden the ball was slammed all the way to one side. A light tap on opposite rudder, and now the ball was slammed to the other side. 20 seconds of wild oscillations back-and-forth finally got the ball somewhat centered again, only to start the process over again on the next thermal. I have time in a Bonanza V-tail, which was famous for the "Bonanza Boogie", where the nose would oscillate side-to-side in turbulence. The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be.
So, I guess, after hearing alot of these responses, my question is now different. My question now goes like this: Is the KitFox I flew normal, or is it worse than the average KitFox? This particular plane was ground-looped and repaired twice. Is there a possibility it is somehow bent, or rigged incorrectly? Is it's handling characteristic of the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun.
Any further advice would be appreciated!
Best,
Nick
[quote] | Quote: |
Time: 08:18:56 AM PST US
From: Guy Buchanan <bnn(at)nethere.com> (bnn(at)nethere.com)
Subject: Re: Buying a KitFox, First Question: Handling of IV-1050
vs. Handling of IV-1200
--> Kitfox-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn(at)nethere.com> (bnn(at)nethere.com)
At 09:16 AM 10/2/2006, you wrote:
| Quote: | I was very "unimpressed" with how the IV-1050 handled in yaw, it sure
seems to lack yaw stability.
|
My IV has very good authority to the rudder; has adverse yaw roughly
equivalent to a Decathlon, (much more than a 172,) and has a "dead band" in
the middle where it will fly sideways +/- 2 degrees of yaw. I am a neophyte
and have had no trouble flying straight or landing in what I consider
"challenging" conditions.
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
FLIER(at)sbcglobal.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:17 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
Hey Nick,
Kitfox rudder control is pretty much required all the
time on the ground or in the air. In smooth stable
air no prob -- hands and feet off when trimmed. In
thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as
well as pitch and roll most of the time.
A Kitfox is flown like a sports car rather than a
sedan. It takes more attention but that's why
they're fun.
What you describe is typical of folks who have not
spent a lot of time in light short-coupled fabric
taildraggers.
Regards,
Ted
--- Original Message ---
From: Nick Scholtes <Nick(at)Scholtes1.com>
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: KitFox Rudder Authority
| Quote: | Guy,
Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked
where I am located,
|
| Quote: | I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago.
I really appreciate you comparing the flight
characteristics to another
|
| Quote: | airplane, something I can relate to. This type of
response is very
|
| Quote: | useful, much better than the "My feet are faster
than yours, and if
|
| Quote: | you're not man enough to fly a tailwheel, then
you're a wuss" type of
|
| Quote: | replies that seem to be so popular! I am very
familiar with the Super
|
| Quote: | Decathlon. If the Model IV flies like a Super
Decathlon, then I have no
|
| Quote: | problem with it at all.
The problem I have is that the one-and-only KitFox
that I have flown,
|
| Quote: | did not handle like a Decathlon at all. It handled
like a, well, I
|
| Quote: | don't know what it handled like. Let me describe:
Firstly, the whole
|
| Quote: | "you've got to use the rudders on a tailwheel
airplane" thing really
|
| Quote: | refers to it's ground handling. And, the KitFox I
flew handled superbly
|
| Quote: | on the ground, felt like a Cub. But, in the air, it
was a totally
|
| Quote: | different animal. In the air, it was untameable.
It just simply wasn't
|
| Quote: | any fun at all. What would happen is, I would get
it straight-and-level
|
| Quote: | and coordinated, and then a minor thermal (nothing
even noteworthy)
|
| Quote: | would come by, and all of a sudden the ball was
slammed all the way to
|
| Quote: | one side. A light tap on opposite rudder, and now
the ball was slammed
|
| Quote: | to the other side. 20 seconds of wild oscillations
back-and-forth
|
| Quote: | finally got the ball somewhat centered again, only
to start the process
|
| Quote: | over again on the next thermal. I have time in a
Bonanza V-tail, which
|
| Quote: | was famous for the "Bonanza Boogie", where the nose
would oscillate
|
| Quote: | side-to-side in turbulence. The KitFox that I flew
was WAY worse than
|
| Quote: | any Bonanza ever could be.
So, I guess, after hearing alot of these responses,
my question is now
|
| Quote: | different. My question now goes like this: Is the
KitFox I flew
|
| Quote: | normal, or is it worse than the average KitFox? This
particular plane
|
| Quote: | was ground-looped and repaired twice. Is there a
possibility it is
|
| Quote: | somehow bent, or rigged incorrectly? Is it's
handling characteristic of
|
| Quote: | the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better? I'm sure I
could be a "hotshot
|
| Quote: | tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it flew so
crappy that I just
|
| Quote: | didn't see where it was any fun.
Any further advice would be appreciated!
Best,
Nick
|
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guy Buchanan
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1204
Location: Ramona, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:37 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
At 08:39 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote:
| Quote: | Thank you very much with the great reply. You asked where I am located,
I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago.
|
You're welcome, but I can't be of much help, since I'm in San Diego. Some
other listers may be in the area though.
| Quote: | If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then I have no problem with
it at all.
|
Sorry. I was being very specific at to adverse yaw only. My Kitfox doesn't
fly much like a Decathlon otherwise. Using automotive comparisons the
Kitfox is a Lotus 7, the Decathlon a light truck, and the Bonanza a BMW 5
series. My experience with the two indicate that the Kitfox has much
lighter control forces in all axes, much higher roll rate, somewhat higher
yaw rate, and similar pitch rate. Couple this with a lighter wing loading
and some days you literally dance your way across the sky. (I fly in all
VFR conditions. I think turbulence is fun.) Of course, this dance is
conducted only with the fingers and toes, never arms and legs.
I do think, however, that if you had no problem with the Decathlon, you'll
have no problem with a Kitfox IV. Indeed the only problem you'll have is
getting that SEG off your face. (I did all my tailwheel training in a
Decathlon.)
| Quote: | The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any Bonanza ever could be.
|
No, this doesn't describe my IV. Mine tracks very nicely as long as your
feet are on the pedals, even in turbulence. It just doesn't center very
well. You can be as much as one ball off and feel nothing in the pedals.
(My butt's not attuned to it yet, either.) Other IV's with the thick rudder
"option" do center.
| Quote: | I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and tough-it-out, but it
flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was any fun.
|
Others will have to help you with the comparisons, but "crappy" doesn't
describe my IV. Be advised, though, that different people define "crappy"
quite differently. I absolutely loath the Cessna 172. It's like driving a
Mercedes 240D. Slow, unresponsive, mushy. Yet I know people who just LOVE
their 172's. I just scratch my head. Prior to the Kitfox my love was an
F33A Bonanza: muscular, responsive; a goes-where-you-want-it-to-go kind of
airplane. The controls are well balanced, with suitable forces and enough
authority to handle extreme conditions. I also love the Cessna 152. It
responds very much like my IV, and nothing like a 172. The Decathlon was
OK, but I thought the rudder forces were much too high; out of proportion
to the aileron and elevator forces.
Hope it helps!
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Guy Buchanan
Deceased K-IV 1200
A glider pilot too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FLIER(at)sbcglobal.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:04 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
Good description Guy!
--- Original Message ---
From: Guy Buchanan <bnn(at)nethere.com>
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority
| Quote: |
<bnn(at)nethere.com>
|
| Quote: |
At 08:39 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote:
>Thank you very much with the great reply. You
asked where I am located,
|
| Quote: | >I'm in Illiniois, about 70 miles SW of Chicago.
You're welcome, but I can't be of much help, since
I'm in San Diego. Some
|
| Quote: | other listers may be in the area though.
>If the Model IV flies like a Super Decathlon, then
I have no problem with
|
| Quote: | >it at all.
Sorry. I was being very specific at to adverse yaw
only. My Kitfox doesn't
|
| Quote: | fly much like a Decathlon otherwise. Using
automotive comparisons the
|
| Quote: | Kitfox is a Lotus 7, the Decathlon a light truck,
and the Bonanza a BMW 5
|
| Quote: | series. My experience with the two indicate that the
Kitfox has much
|
| Quote: | lighter control forces in all axes, much higher roll
rate, somewhat higher
|
| Quote: | yaw rate, and similar pitch rate. Couple this with a
lighter wing loading
|
| Quote: | and some days you literally dance your way across
the sky. (I fly in all
|
| Quote: | VFR conditions. I think turbulence is fun.) Of
course, this dance is
|
| Quote: | conducted only with the fingers and toes, never arms
and legs.
|
| Quote: |
I do think, however, that if you had no problem with
the Decathlon, you'll
|
| Quote: | have no problem with a Kitfox IV. Indeed the only
problem you'll have is
|
| Quote: | getting that SEG off your face. (I did all my
tailwheel training in a
|
| Quote: | Decathlon.)
>The KitFox that I flew was WAY worse than any
Bonanza ever could be.
|
| Quote: |
No, this doesn't describe my IV. Mine tracks very
nicely as long as your
|
| Quote: | feet are on the pedals, even in turbulence. It just
doesn't center very
|
| Quote: | well. You can be as much as one ball off and feel
nothing in the pedals.
|
| Quote: | (My butt's not attuned to it yet, either.) Other
IV's with the thick rudder
|
| Quote: | "option" do center.
>I'm sure I could be a "hotshot tailwheel pilot" and
tough-it-out, but it
|
| Quote: | >flew so crappy that I just didn't see where it was
any fun.
|
| Quote: |
Others will have to help you with the comparisons,
but "crappy" doesn't
|
| Quote: | describe my IV. Be advised, though, that different
people define "crappy"
|
| Quote: | quite differently. I absolutely loath the Cessna
172. It's like driving a
|
| Quote: | Mercedes 240D. Slow, unresponsive, mushy. Yet I know
people who just LOVE
|
| Quote: | their 172's. I just scratch my head. Prior to the
Kitfox my love was an
|
| Quote: | F33A Bonanza: muscular, responsive; a goes-where-you-
want-it-to-go kind of
|
| Quote: | airplane. The controls are well balanced, with
suitable forces and enough
|
| Quote: | authority to handle extreme conditions. I also love
the Cessna 152. It
|
| Quote: | responds very much like my IV, and nothing like a
172. The Decathlon was
|
| Quote: | OK, but I thought the rudder forces were much too
high; out of proportion
|
| Quote: | to the aileron and elevator forces.
Hope it helps!
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly
to Bob Ducar.
|
| Quote: |
_-
======================================================
|
======
browse
Subscriptions page,
FAQ,
List
| Quote: | _-
======================================================
|
======
Web Forums!
| Quote: | _-
======================================================
|
======
| Quote: | _-
======================================================
|
======
Admin.
| Quote: | _-
======================================================
|
======
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
john(at)leptron.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:19 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
characteristic of the IV-1050, and is the IV-1200 better?
The 1200 has a tail that is 8 inches taller than the 1050 and does handle a bunch different.
John Oakley
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michel
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:34 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:15 PM, flier wrote:
| Quote: | In thermals or wind you're making rudder adjustments as
well as pitch and roll most of the time.
|
So, it's not just me! 
What I was wondering is, how much is it necessary to rectify the flight
attitude when in turbulence. The longest I have been flying non-stop is
three hours. In a normal summer day along the coast, the wet maritime
air goes up to nice cumulus, creating thermals. One wing falls a bit,
then the other, the tail goes one side, then the other. Still a rookie,
I feel I have to correct with the stick and rudder. It is tiresome with
time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence?
Cheers,
Michel
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox5flyer
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:16 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
Just let it wiggle Michel. By now you probably don't even need to think
about the corrections. When I had my M2 several times I turned the stick
over to experienced pilots and predictably they were all over the sky, but
after a bit of time they settled down and stopped over correcting so much.
Even at best, the I, II, and III are wiggly in turbulence. It's the nature
of the beast.
Deke
---
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Float Flyr
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:45 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
The floats on my 'Fox (Mod III-A) may have a pendulum effect that helps keep thing under control. I have made coordinated turns with banks approaching 60deg with no problems. I find it easier to land than a Super Cub on floats but it doesn't have the visceral sound that the bigger four stroke engine gives.
I have yet to spin... I haven't been high enough for a safe recovery and I'm not so sure I want to with floats on. The altitude, or lack of it has kept me from stalling, except of course when landing.
When landing the Cub I did have a bit of a bad habit of always touching my right float first. My float instructor kept telling me to use the rudder pedals. I don't have that problem in the 'Fox.
On floats the plane is more manoeuvrable, easier to fly and much more fun than the C172 I trained on. there is a bit of adverse yaw... Probably slightly more than the C172 I did notice before installing a small trim tab on the rudder it was a lot more difficult to keep things straight and I was consistently on the right rudder pedal in straight and level flight. The slightest relaxing of my right foot would cause a good left yaw. As I said a small trim tab has cured that.
One of these days I may get around to finding out what those funny round things are for.
Noel [quote]
--
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guy Buchanan
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1204
Location: Ramona, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:23 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
At 10:33 AM 10/4/2006, you wrote:
| Quote: | It is tiresome with
time. But is it necessary? How do you, guys, fly in turbulence?
|
I tend to correct pitch immediately; the 582 quickly loads up or the EGT
peaks. I let the vertical stab handle yaw, but keep my feet on the pedals.
(There's much less yaw resistance with your feet on the floor.) I only
correct roll and heading when I absolutely have to, (meaning: the plane's
going to slide off into a spiral,) and use rudder in concert. As a lifelong
sailor I only mind the motion when I bounce my head off the skylight! :'(
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582-C / Warp / 100% done, thanks mostly to Bob Ducar.
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Guy Buchanan
Deceased K-IV 1200
A glider pilot too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkhull(at)kc.rr.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:32 pm Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
That's why I installed seat belts
--
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eskflyer(at)lvcisp.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:58 pm Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
NICK my kitfox is a model 2 and has the small rudder and vertical stabilizer. The plane has never been damaged . When flying in thermals or wind gusts it is no problem at all . just a little up and down and the normal for most small GA aircraft in keeping on the given course. I would think the one you flew might be bent somewhere or it could be was never right to begin with ?. If you are ever in or around Lawton Oklahoma would be more than glad to take you up and let you fly the lady.
Sorry about my earlier post did not mean to sound to bad lol .
I have flown several foxes and they all flew fine .
Take care fly safe fly low fly slow fly fun fly KITFOX
John Perry
kitofx 2 N718PD
582/ subbie soon
Hot PINK Ivo inflight
TD/ Straight floats
[quote]
[b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MichaelGibbs(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 8:37 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
I did not experience the type of flight performance you did in my
Model IV-1200. Later Model IVs and the Series 5-7 Kitfoxes have a
larger vertical stabilizer and rudder than the earlier models do,
which gives them more yaw stability.
While certainly requiring more attention than my Piper Arrow, my
Model IV handled turbulent summer air without a lot of effort on my
part. I will admit, however, that it gets easier with time, which
suggests that your feet develop an "auto pilot" operation of their
own.
Mike G.
N728KF
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kerrjohna(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:46 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
It has been interesting to follow this thread as contributors speak of the lateral stability and rudder authority. They are different things and might be considered counter to one another: the more stable an aircraft is laterally the more rudder authority is required to counter that stability. The balance of the two is part of design compromise process and is not unique to this design. We can all cite designs that have evolved over time to accomodate increased power and other changes.
One such evolution is the very popular RV series that saw a signicant increase in veritical stabilizer area and similarly an increase in rudder size when the design of the RV6 was deemed to be improvable ala the RV8 and RV9. The fuselage was also lengthened to further improve stability.
In the past few months I have had the opportunity to fly 2 certified airplanes and found them HARD to fly because they were so stable as to need forceful control input to get them to change direction. Flying them was much more tiring than the light pressure needed to control my 'Fox or my RV9.
I guess I could talk with a similar jaundiced attitude toward the certified transition as some have exhibited toward their transition to lighter more responsive designs. I have never flown a fully aerobatic aircraft, but I suspect that the feel is different for them as well. I have heard that aerobatic craft don't make particularly good cross country flyers. I guess our reaction is based on the paradigm we are each in.
John Kerr
======
&g [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
john(at)leptron.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
dEar John,
Pleze noot use such Big wOrds on us,
Other than that you made a good point! Well said.
John Oakley
From: owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-kitfox-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of kerrjohna(at)comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 11:44 AM
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority
It has been interesting to follow this thread as contributors speak of the lateral stability and rudder authority. They are different things and might be considered counter to one another: the more stable an aircraft is laterally the more rudder authority is required to counter that stability. The balance of the two is part of design compromise process and is not unique to this design. We can all cite designs that have evolved over time to accomodate increased power and other changes.
One such evolution is the very popular RV series that saw a signicant increase in veritical stabilizer area and similarly an increase in rudder size when the design of the RV6 was deemed to be improvable ala the RV8 and RV9. The fuselage was also lengthened to further improve stability.
In the past few months I have had the opportunity to fly 2 certified airplanes and found them HARD to fly because they were so stable as to need forceful control input to get them to change direction. Flying them was much more tiring than the light pressure needed to control my 'Fox or my RV9.
I guess I could talk with a similar jaundiced attitude toward the certified transition as some have exhibited toward their transition to lighter more responsive designs. I have never flown a fully aerobatic aircraft, but I suspect that the feel is different for them as well. I have heard that aerobatic craft don't make particularly good cross country flyers. I guess our reaction is based on the paradigm we are each in.
John Kerr
======
&g | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
01234567890123
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aerobatics(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:07 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
In a message dated 10/5/2006 12:51:34 P.M. Central Daylight Time, kerrjohna(at)comcast.net writes:
| Quote: | | It has been interesting to follow this thread as contributors speak of the lateral stability and rudder authority. They are different things and might be considered counter to one another: the more stable an aircraft is laterally the more rudder authority is required to counter that stability. The balance of the two is part of design compromise process and is not unique to this design. We can all cite designs that have evolved over time to accomodate increased power and other changes. |
Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of compromises...
I have a bit of time in some aerobatic planes Pitts S2B was amazing not inherently stable, but not unstable, just very responsive, I Loved it. Light controls, point it there, it stays... a neutral set up. I have a bit of time in a RV4 and found very much the same thing... great airplane...
But so is the KF in what it does...
Dave
KF2
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michel
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:40 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
On Oct 4, 2006, at 8:15 PM, Fox5flyer wrote:
| Quote: | Just let it wiggle Michel.
|
Yes, I guess I should, Deke. It's just that, I need to fly more to get
the feel of it.
On Oct 4, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Guy Buchanan wrote:
| Quote: | As a lifelong sailor I only mind the motion when I bounce my head off
the skylight! :'(
|
I understand, Guy. But as Rod Machado puts it: turbulence are like
waves at sea. The only difference is that you don't see them ... and
that's what horror movies are made of!
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michel
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:42 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
On Oct 5, 2006, at 8:52 PM, John Oakley wrote:
| Quote: | Pleze noot use such Big wOrds on us,
|
Not a problem for me! You see, fancy words in English are mostly from
French origin so ... vive la différence!
.. Okay, I'll shut up!
Cheers,
Michel
do not archive
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
_________________
Kitfox 3 - Jabiru 2200 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
janderson412(at)hotmail.c
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:36 pm Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of compromises...
Except de Haviland aircraft......that old gent had a secret when it came to
control and stability...
From: Aerobatics(at)aol.com
Reply-To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Re: KitFox Rudder Authority
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:07:05 EDT
In a message dated 10/5/2006 12:51:34 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
kerrjohna(at)comcast.net writes:
It has been interesting to follow this thread as contributors speak of the
lateral stability and rudder authority. They are different things and might
be considered counter to one another: the more stable an aircraft is
laterally the more rudder authority is required to counter that stability.
The balance of the two is part of design compromise process and is not
unique to this design. We can all cite designs that have evolved over time
to accomodate increased power and other changes.
Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of compromises...
I have a bit of time in some aerobatic planes Pitts S2B was amazing not
inherently stable, but not unstable, just very responsive, I Loved it.
Light controls, point it there, it stays... a neutral set up. I have a bit
of time in a RV4 and found very much the same thing... great airplane...
But so is the KF in what it does...
Dave
KF2
_________________________________________________________________
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jose_m_toro(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:44 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
John:
I'm curious about the control and stability of the
DeHavilands. When I was a kid, I used to fly with my
father in a DeHaviland Beaver, but never have had the
opportunity of being the PIC.
Jose
--- John Anderson <janderson412(at)hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
<janderson412(at)hotmail.com>
Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of
compromises...
Except de Haviland aircraft......that old gent had a
secret when it came to
control and stability...
From: Aerobatics(at)aol.com
Reply-To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
To: kitfox-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Re: KitFox Rudder
Authority
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 15:07:05 EDT
In a message dated 10/5/2006 12:51:34 P.M. Central
Daylight Time,
kerrjohna(at)comcast.net writes:
It has been interesting to follow this thread as
contributors speak of the
lateral stability and rudder authority. They are
different things and might
be considered counter to one another: the more
stable an aircraft is
laterally the more rudder authority is required to
counter that stability.
The balance of the two is part of design compromise
process and is not
unique to this design. We can all cite designs that
have evolved over time
to accomodate increased power and other changes.
Agreed........ an airplane design IS full of
compromises...
I have a bit of time in some aerobatic planes Pitts
S2B was amazing not
inherently stable, but not unstable, just very
responsive, I Loved it.
Light controls, point it there, it stays... a
neutral set up. I have a bit
of time in a RV4 and found very much the same
thing... great airplane...
But so is the KF in what it does...
Dave
KF2
_________________________________________________________________
|
__________________________________________________
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
foxfloatflyer(at)hotmail.
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:24 am Post subject: KitFox Rudder Authority |
|
|
Yesterday I had my first aerobatic flight in a Hiperbipe. We flew a number of maneuvers, including this year's Sportsman routine. I flew the plane to and from the practice area and found that it required a little more rudder pressure to yaw the nose than the Cessnas I usually fly. Needless to say, the tiny rudder of the Hiperbipe is sufficient for aerobatics and had enough area that we were climbing in knife-edge flight. The straight-tail 172 I used to own had more rudder response than more modern 172s and of the 4 place Cessnas the Cardinal seemed the most responsive to rudder (pay attention to the elevator) and the 182 the least. First flight of my Kitfox 5 should take place by Halloween. I look forward to comparing flight characteristics of the 'fox to these other aircraft.
Joel Mapes
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Kitfox-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kitfox-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
